Cited by 78Spinal Cord Injury ResearchStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics

Non-invasive, Brain-controlled Functional Electrical Stimulation for Locomotion Rehabilitation in Individuals with Paraplegia

Open access
Selfslagh, Aurelie, Shokur, Solaiman, Campos, Debora S. F., Donati, Ana R. C., Almeida, Sabrina, Yamauti, Seidi Y., Coelho, Daniel B., Bouri, Mohamed +1 more·2019·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Spinal cord injury (SCI) impairs the flow of sensory and motor signals between the brain and the areas of the body located below the lesion level. Here, we describe a neurorehabilitation setup combining several approaches that were shown to have a positive effect in patients with SCI: gait training by means of non-invasive, surface functional electrical stimulation (sFES) of the lower-limbs, proprioceptive and tactile feedback, balance control through overground walking and cue-based decoding of cortical motor commands using a brain-machine interface (BMI). The central component of this new approach was the development of a novel muscle stimulation paradigm for step generation using 16 sFES channels taking all sub-phases of physiological gait into account. We also developed a new BMI protocol to identify left and right leg motor imagery that was used to trigger an sFES-generated step movement. Our system was tested and validated with two patients with chronic paraplegia. These patients were able to walk safely with 65–70% body weight support, accumulating a total of 4,580 steps with this setup. We observed cardiovascular improvements and less dependency on walking assistance, but also partial neurological recovery in both patients, with substantial rates of motor improvement for one of them.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-019-43041-9

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Brain-controlled neuromuscular stimulation also mediated durable functional improvements of the engaged muscles after stroke and spinal cord injury.

    “Brain-controlled neuromuscular stimulation also mediated durable functional improvements of the engaged muscles after stroke36 and spinal cord injury22,24,37.”

    From Walking naturally after spinal cord injury using a brain–spine interface (2023) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Results (Clinical improvements; page unavailable) report improved motor function in stimulated muscles of two patients with spinal cord injury, assessed without stimulation after training. The paper does not establish that those improvements persisted over a longer follow-up period, so the claim of durability is not supported by this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Selfslagh, A., Shokur, S., Campos, D. S. F., Donati, A. R. C., Almeida, S., Yamauti, S. Y., Coelho, D. B., Bouri, M., & Nicolelis, M. A. L.
Affiliations
  • École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH)
  • Associação de Assistência à Criança Deficiente (BR)
  • Universidade Federal do ABC (BR)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Nicolelis, Miguel A. L.
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2019-05-01
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
6782-6782
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2942835517
Cited by
78
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 2
FWCI
8.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
  • Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
  • Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos
  • Fundação de Apoio à Pesquisa do Rio Grande do Norte
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spinal Cord Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Keywords
spinal cord injury, paraplegia, brain-computer interface, motor imagery, gait training, body weight support, proprioceptive feedback, tactile feedback, balance control, neurorehabilitation
MeSH terms
Neurological Rehabilitation, Adult, Brain, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Exercise Therapy, Gait, Humans, Locomotion, Paraplegia, Spinal Cord Injuries, Walking

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review